[QUOTE=Lonestriper;49231887]Would you agree that when there is a problem something has to be done to alleviate it?[/QUOTE]
I agree that there is a problem. I agree that, if it were possible for something to be done about it, it ought to be done.
I just don't believe anything [I]can[/I] be done. The politics in this country have become too polarized and entrenched, I believe we are no longer capable of effective change. This isn't just regarding firearms, mind you, this is regarding a lot of things.
Politicians on both sides have removed compromise from their vocabulary, and it's crippled us.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49231745]So, those are different things. And nothing is "wrong" with me. I think showing a murderer dead is different than an unrelated topic to this thread.[/QUOTE]
Something is definitely wrong with you if you think a monk self-immolating as protest in the 60's is bad for children but a bloody corpse of a murderer on national TV in 2015 is a good thing, don't try to call it unrelated because it is related.
[QUOTE=Lonestriper;49231914]The IRS seems pretty on the ball when it comes to enforcing income taxes. I fail to see how the government is unable to enforce laws unless it sabotages itself enforcing those laws through apathy etc. [/quote]
Taxes and gun confiscation are two wholly different things.
[Quote]
As for cultural issues, yeah. I suppose you could introduce campaigns to change the opinions of Americans but it would take a while. Might be worth it though[/QUOTE]
That is far easier said then done
[QUOTE=sgman91;49231907]Something should be done if there's good reason that the something will cause an overall improvement. As it stands, there's simply no reason to believe that more gun control will lead to less gun deaths.[/QUOTE]
It's not necessarily gun-control I'm advocating. That was just a suggestion I put forward when asked. I'm worried more that literally nothing will be done, as it has for the last few years.
[QUOTE=Ninja Gnome;49231837]how do you propose to remove deadly weapons from the hands of people who see the removal of deadly weapons as tantamount to turning tyrant[/QUOTE]
More weapons
[QUOTE=Tsanummy;49231951]More weapons[/QUOTE]
Clearly if the many mentally disabled and physically infirm victims of this attack [I]had been armed[/I], this all could have been prevented.
[QUOTE=Da Big Man;49231899]If you can back up any claims that individual posters in this thread have done that go right ahead. So far you're just pulling out a sad narrative that holds no meaning in a debate you're sitting back in. If you can't see that Americans are explaining they live in places where everybody worships firearms and would not hesitate to revolt on the idea they could get their guns taken away, you have no place to judge how we know our country works and assume that we're some arrogant kids that shit on other countries like some collective hivemind.[/QUOTE]
Way to take my post out of context. I'm just saying you can't dismiss outside opinions because the poster isn't American. It's important to see what this situation looks like from all views. I believe its obviously ignorant of people to assume that America is in the same situation as other Western countries, but its also ignorant to claim that they have no clue what they are talking about because they are not American. It's like the story of the fish that don't know of water, because they have never experienced not being in water. It's best to look at this from all perspectives is all I'm really trying to say here.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49231971]Clearly if the many mentally disabled and physically infirm victims of the mental health facility that were killed [I]had been armed[/I], this all could have been prevented.[/QUOTE]
how much do you want to bet that Trump is going to say something of that nature
[QUOTE=Lambeth;49231909]The fact that California has the strictest gun regulations is meaningless if the next state over has looser gun laws. Gun regulations aren't a failure because perpetrators have a car.[/QUOTE]
Right, because nationwide gun bands [I]totally [/I]wouldn't result in an increase in criminal gun trafficking. I mean nobody was smuggling alcohol around during the prohibition right? Nobody's smuggling cocaine into the country these days right? Nobody's making meth and distributing it right? Good thing those are all/were all (prohibition) illegal nationwide, because that makes all the difference! :mysterysolved:
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49231971]Clearly if the many mentally disabled and physically infirm victims of this attack [I]had been armed[/I], this all could have been prevented.[/QUOTE]
I think what he's implying is take them by force.
[QUOTE=l337k1ll4;49231989]I think what he's implying is take them by force.[/QUOTE]
Taking guns by force is just stupid and will result in a revolution, and will create a black market similar to what the middle east has.
I live in california and can tell you guys that the gun laws around here are based mostly on fear and lack of actual gun knowledge. You can't import a .50 cal desert eagle, but you can get a .44 cal version and just switch out the barrels. We also ban AR and AKs based on whether it posesses part like heatshields and bayonet lugs, when was the last time someone was bayonetted in america? If you take those parts off, your gun somehow becomes becomes less scary and becomes legal. If you're going to make new gun laws, know the subject at least like god damn
Something something gun rights something something culture something something Europe does it better something something etc
We don't even know if the guns they had are legal or illegal or even what or why these people did or why they did it, I think a gun debate is a bit premature
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49231991]Taking guns by force is just stupid and will result in a revolution, and will create a black market similar to what the middle east has.[/QUOTE]
This ladies and gentlemen is a prime example of why the rest of the world thinks we're loony
[QUOTE=Lambeth;49231909]The fact that California has the strictest gun regulations is meaningless if the next state over has looser gun laws. Gun regulations aren't a failure because perpetrators have a car.[/QUOTE]
You're stating that those laws are ineffective if they're close to areas that don't enforce them. Even if bordering states have that law, it still won't be fixed since California is close to Mexico.
[QUOTE=Fhenexx;49232000]Something something gun rights something something culture something something Europe does it better something something etc
We don't even know if the guns they had are legal or illegal or even what or why these people did or why they did it, I think a gun debate is a bit premature[/QUOTE]
A mass shooting takes places in America. Of course there's gonna be a gun debate on Facepunch :P
[QUOTE=bdd458;49231979]how much do you want to bet that Trump is going to say something of that nature[/QUOTE]
Shockingly, he's barely registered the event, save for a tweet wishing good luck to law enforcement. I guess he's saving his best stuff for after the race of the shooters is confirmed.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;49231909]The fact that California has the strictest gun regulations is meaningless if the next state over has looser gun laws. Gun regulations aren't a failure because perpetrators have a car.[/QUOTE]
The Department of Justice concluded after the sunset of the 1994 federal assault weapons ban (which instituted California-style bans [i]nationwide[/i]) that it had [i]at best[/i] a negligible effect and may have actually contributed to arms and drug trafficking in the same way Prohibition did.
Yet already people are calling for assault weapon bans as if that will fix the current situation. There's a saying about those who don't learn from history. Again, you can have my guns if you can fix the problem. This won't.
[QUOTE=Kyle902;49232009]This ladies and gentlemen is a prime example of why the rest of the world thinks we're loony[/QUOTE]
Ladies and gents, this is a true example of someone with their head up their ass.
Can we keep the gun discussion out of the thread and keep this for people who want to know about the event itself
[QUOTE=hippowombat;49231984]Right, because nationwide gun bands [I]totally [/I]wouldn't result in an increase in criminal gun trafficking. I mean nobody was smuggling alcohol around during the prohibition right? Nobody's smuggling cocaine into the country these days right? Nobody's making meth and distributing it right? Good thing those are all/were all (prohibition) illegal nationwide, because that makes all the difference! :mysterysolved:[/QUOTE]
Hey man I wasn't advocating gun bans please read the words I write.
[QUOTE=Big Dumb American;49232017]Shockingly, he's barely registered the event, save for a tweet wishing good luck to law enforcement. I guess he's saving his best stuff for after the race of the shooters is confirmed.[/QUOTE]
Hey its trump so he'll end up saying something retarded no matter what race the shooters are
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49232028]Ladies and gents, this is a true example of someone with their head up their ass.[/QUOTE]
You just compared [B]potential [/B]american gun control to middle eastern black market
try and think for a second
[QUOTE=ColdAsRice;49231998]I live in california and can tell you guys that the gun laws around here are based mostly on fear and lack of actual gun knowledge. You can't import a .50 cal desert eagle, but you can get a .44 cal version and just switch out the barrels. We also ban AR and AKs based on whether it posesses part like heatshields and bayonet lugs, when was the last time someone was bayonetted in america? If you take those parts off, your gun somehow becomes becomes less scary and becomes legal. If you're going to make new gun laws, know the subject at least like god damn[/QUOTE]
The problem is that it's just a bunch of urban raised politicians who have never shot a gun in their life. These people have no idea how guns actually operate, thus they create dumbshit laws like this. If we are to implement gun control measures, we need someone who actually knows about guns to create them for them to work effectively but the problem is that no one who actually knows how they work wants them to be controled. It's a fucking nightmare for someone like me who wants firearms to have at least some restrictions.
[QUOTE=Lambeth;49232032]Hey man I wasn't advocating gun bans please read the words I write.[/QUOTE]
Ah shit I made the wrong connection, sorry. :suicide:
[QUOTE=ilikecorn;49231995]Well, to be fair, "nothing" was done because the side that wanted to change something was literally suggesting banning things because they were "spooky". I mean I totally and completely agree, there are some things that we need to change, some things we need to update, some things we need to stop, but the fucking second you say "we need to ban this because it looks scary", you completely lose my support.
We need to approach this from a logical and reasonable standpoint, from as many sides of the argument as possible, and it's honestly hard to debate with someone when they say "but you don't need a collapsing stock, it's a scary assault rifle feature, it needs to be banned". Things like that. You know?[/QUOTE]
That stuff is silly as hell, I know. There are ways to restrict firearms which don't have to involve doing stuff like that. Whether it is effective or not is up to debate but people really shouldn't dismiss it out of hand due to 'it's too hard' etc. The US could move mountain ranges if it wanted to. 'It's too hard' shouldn't really be in the vocabulary of Americans at all
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49232028]Ladies and gents, this is a true example of someone with their head up their ass.[/QUOTE]
Im not the one saying I'll fucking revolt against the government if they confiscated my firearms.
[QUOTE=Gwoodman;49232042]You just compared [B]potential [/B]american gun control to middle eastern black market
try and think for a second[/QUOTE]
If you (somehow) disarm 250ish million people of 300 million guns, criminals will still keep their guns that the FFL process has no knowledge of. They will use that to make money and etc etc. It's pretty similar. Not to mention the people (including myself) that will revolt when our way of defending our homes is ripped away.
[editline]2nd December 2015[/editline]
[QUOTE=Kyle902;49232050]Im not the one saying I'll fucking revolt against the government if they confiscated my firearms.[/QUOTE]
I would fight back as will most sane gun owners. Maybe not with violence but definitely with legal action. Criminals will just go lol have fun with that
[QUOTE=Kyle902;49232009]This ladies and gentlemen is a prime example of why the rest of the world thinks we're loony[/QUOTE]
Wait, how is it loony to suggest taking guns out of the hands of extremists already dug into gun culture wouldn't result in them getting weapons illegally? It happens in literally every other country with heavy gun control and individuals willing to get their hands on them. Weapons are built [i]from scratch[/i] to satisfy the needs of people that want their hands on them. Australia, Chechnya, China, Mexico, Russia, you see improvised weapons in the hands of thugs and the unruly. Massive police caches of cheaply chopped Stens and shit. It's a very real possibility that's quite common.
[QUOTE=agentfazexx;49232051]If you (somehow) disarm 250ish million people of 300 million guns, criminals will still keep their guns that the FFL process has no knowledge of. They will use that to make money and etc etc. It's pretty similar. Not to mention the people (including myself) that will revolt when our way of defending our homes is ripped away.
[editline]2nd December 2015[/editline]
I would fight back as will most sane gun owners. Criminals will just go lol have fun with that[/QUOTE]
You just said you'd attack law enforcement officers if they tried to take your guns.
And you say other people have their heads up their asses.
Sorry, you need to Log In to post a reply to this thread.
